Search This Blog

It's not Consciousness that Drives Our Mind, Study Claims

Everyone
knows what it feels like to have consciousness: it's that self-evident sense of
personal awareness, which gives us a feeling of ownership and control over the
thoughts, emotions and experiences that we have every day.

Most experts
think that consciousness can be divided into two parts: the experience of
consciousness (or personal awareness), and the contents of consciousness, which
include things such as thoughts, beliefs, sensations, perceptions, intentions,
memories and emotions.

It's easy to assume that these contents of consciousness
are somehow chosen, caused or controlled by our personal awareness – after all,
thoughts don't exist until we think them.

But in a new
research paper in Frontiers of Psychology, we argue that this is a mistake. We
suggest that our personal awareness does not create, cause or choose our
beliefs, feelings or perceptions. Instead, the contents of consciousness are
generated "behind the scenes" by fast, efficient, non-conscious
systems in our brains. All this happens without any interference from our
personal awareness, which sits passively in the passenger seat while these
processes occur. Put simply, we don't consciously choose our thoughts or our
feelings – we become aware of them.

If this
sounds strange, consider how effortlessly we regain consciousness each morning
after losing it the night before; how thoughts and emotions – welcome or
otherwise – arrive already formed in our minds; how the colours and shapes we
see are constructed into meaningful objects or memorable faces without any
effort or input from our conscious mind.

Consider
that all the neuropsychological processes responsible for moving your body or
using words to form sentences take place without involving your personal
awareness. We believe that the processes responsible for generating the
contents of consciousness do the same. Our thinking has been influenced by
research into neuropsychological and neuropsychiatric disorders, as well as
more recent cognitive neuroscience studies using hypnosis.

The studies
using hypnosis show that a person's mood, thoughts and perceptions can be
profoundly altered by suggestion. In such studies, participants go through a
hypnosis induction procedure, to help them to enter a mentally focused and
absorbed state. Then, suggestions are made to change their perceptions and
experiences.

For example,
in one study, researchers recorded the brain activity of participants when they
raised their arm intentionally, when it was lifted by a pulley, and when it
moved in response to a hypnotic suggestion that it was being lifted by a
pulley. Similar areas of the brain were active during the involuntary and the
suggested "alien" movement, while brain activity for the intentional
action was different.

So, hypnotic
suggestion can be seen as a means of communicating an idea or belief that, when
accepted, has the power to alter a person's perceptions or behaviour.

All this may
leave one wondering where our thoughts, emotions and perceptions actually come
from. We argue that the contents of consciousness are a subset of the experiences,
emotions, thoughts and beliefs that are generated by non-conscious processes
within our brains. This subset takes the form of a personal narrative, which is
constantly being updated. The personal narrative exists in parallel with our
personal awareness, but the latter has no influence over the former.

The personal
narrative is important because it provides information to be stored in your
autobiographical memory (the story you tell yourself, about yourself), and
gives human beings a way of communicating the things we have perceived and
experienced to others. This, in turn, allows us to generate survival
strategies; for example, by learning to predict other people's behaviour.
Interpersonal skills like this underpin the development of social and cultural
structures, which have promoted the survival of human kind for millennia.

So, we argue
that it is the ability to communicate the contents of one's personal narrative
- and not personal awareness – that gives humans their unique evolutionary
advantage.

If the
experience of consciousness does not confer any particular advantage, it's not
clear what its purpose is. But as a passive accompaniment to non-conscious
processes, we don't think that the phenomena of personal awareness has a purpose,
in much the same way that rainbows do not. Rainbows simply result from the
reflection, refraction and dispersion of sunlight through water droplets – none
of which serves any particular purpose.

Our
conclusions also raise questions about the notions of free will and personal
responsibility. If our personal awareness does not control the contents of the
personal narrative which reflects our thoughts, feelings, emotions, actions and
decisions, then perhaps we should not be held responsible for them. In response
to this, we argue that free will and personal responsibility are notions that
have been constructed by society. As such, they are built into the way we see
and understand ourselves as individuals, and as a species.

Because of
this, they are represented within the non-conscious processes that create our
personal narratives, and in the way we communicate those narratives to others.
Just because consciousness has been placed in the passenger seat, does not mean
we need to dispense with important everyday notions such as free will and
personal responsibility.

In fact,
they are embedded in the workings of our non-conscious brain systems. They have
a powerful purpose in society and have a deep impact on the way we understand
ourselves.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Scientists
said on Thursday they recorded particles travelling faster than light - a
finding that could overturn one of Einstein's fundamental laws of the universe.
Antonio Ereditato, spokesman for the international group of researchers, saidthat measurements taken over three years showed neutrinos pumped from CERN near
Geneva to Gran Sasso in Italy had arrived 60 nanoseconds quicker than light
would have done.

“We
have high confidence in our results. We have checked and rechecked for anything
that could have distorted our measurements but we found nothing," he said.
"We now want colleagues to check them independently.” If
confirmed, the discovery would undermine Albert Einstein's 1905 theory of
special relativity, which says that the speed of light is a "cosmic
constant" and that nothing in the universe can travel faster. That
assertion, which has withstood over a century of testing, is one of the key
elements of the so-called Standard Model of physics, whic…

NASA’s Kepler Space
Telescope discovered an Earth-like planet circling a nearby star within the
Goldilocks zone of our galaxy. Kepler-186f is around 500 light-years from Earth
in the Cygnus constellation. The habitable zone, also identified as the
Goldilocks zone, is the area around a star within which planetary-mass objects
with enough atmospheric pressure can sustain liquid water at their surfaces.

While it has been
projected that there are at least 40 billion Earth-sized planets circling in
our Milky Way Galaxy, this specific finding is labelled the first Earth-sized
planet to be discovered in the habitable zone of another star. What does this mean?In addition to
Kepler-186f, there are 4 other planets that circle a nearby star within the
Kepler-186f system. What this means is that if the neighbouring star to this
planet is just like our Sun, then the likelihood of life on this planet
exponentially increases.

“We know of only one
planet where life survives – Earth. When we hunt for lif…

The reason why certain countries looks bigger or smaller than others is because of something called the Mercator Projection. Putting a 3D planet on a two-dimensional map was something of a challenge for early cartographers and so a Flemish geographer and cartographer named Gerardus Mercator came up with a solution. In 1569 he designed a map that could be accurately used for navigation purposes, but the downside was that his system distorted the size of objects depending on their position relative to the equator. Because of this, landmasses like Antarctica and Greenland appeared much larger than they actually are.

To show how incorrect our understanding of country sizes is, a website called thetruesize.com lets you move landmasses into different locations. Bored Panda has played a bit on this site, and this is what we found. #1 US Moved Down Next To Australia Looks Unbelievably Small

#2 Russia On The Equator Is Not A Giant Bear Anymore #3 If Romania Was An Island In The Arctic Ocean #4 Aust…